Theodore and Barack in Osawatomie

[ellisonz]

12-12-11

Walter Nugent is Tackes Professor Emeritus of History at the University of Notre Dame and a member of HNN's advisory board. He is the author of numerous books, including "The Tolerant Populists: Kansas Populism and Nativism," "Progressivism: A Very Short Introduction," and most recently "Habits of Empire: A History of American Expansionism."

On August 31, 1910, Republican ex-president Theodore Roosevelt gave a rousing speech at Osawatomie, Kansas, against inequity of wealth. On December 6, 2011, Democratic President Barack Obama did the same. What was similar and what was different about what they said? (Osawatomie, by the way, is pronounced “Ah-so-WAH-to-me.” Network newscasters who mispronounced it should have checked with a historian who has lived in Kansas, like me.)

Roosevelt and Obama both said that inequality of wealth and income is unfair. It’s against the American spirit and dream. So it must be reversed. In TR’s day, as the first Gilded Age ended, moguls named Morgan, Vanderbilt, Carnegie and others had amassed wealth beyond the dreams of avarice. One man, John D. Rockefeller, owned more than 1 percent of the entire national wealth. In Obama’s and our day, the new Gilded Age, the wealthiest 1 percent (and especially the top one-tenth of 1 percent) have steadily increased their share of wealth and income since the late 1970s, while most Americans’ income has flat-lined or declined. In TR’s day, this seemed patently unfair. It does today too, except to Republicans who cry “class warfare”—as they have ever since William Jennings Bryan ran against William McKinley in 1896.

More: http://hnn.us/articles/theodore-and-barack-osawatomie

[JDPriestly]

1. Teddy Roosevelt proposed this --

What to do about it? Roosevelt at Osawatomie proposed the following: thorough, federal regulation of railroads and all other interstate corporations; graduated income and inheritance taxes; banking reform to prevent panics and failures; conservation of natural resources; laws setting maximum levels of working hours and wage levels sufficient to provide a decent life for working families; laws (both federal and state) providing compensation for injured workers; and regulation of working conditions for women and children. The goal was “equality of opportunity for all citizens.” TR proclaimed: “I stand for the square deal…. Not merely… for fair play under the present rules of the game, but… for having those rules changed so as to work for a more substantial equality of opportunity and of reward for equally good service.” Therefore, “We must drive the special interests out of politics…. Every special interest is entitled to justice, but not one is entitled to a vote in Congress, to a voice on the bench, or to representation in any public office.” The country needed, he said, a “New Nationalism” that would “put the national need before sectional or personal advantage.”

http://hnn.us/articles/theodore-and-barack-osawatomie

Ever charging forward, ever in command at least of his own ideas, Roosevelt was very clear about just what needed to be done to improve the lot of the 99%.

Obama -- not so charging forward, not so in command was, in my opinion, very vague about how he plans to change things. The payroll tax cut is a no-go for good reason. It would weaken Social Security and not really change the balance of power in the country.

If Obama agrees that we need to "drive the special interests out of politics," he should start with some of the folks in his own cabinet and those he has appointed to commissions and other prestigious positions.

[ellisonz]

2. Roosevelt didn't get all he wanted either.

The payroll tax-cut is paid for through increasing taxes on the wealthy under the Democratic plan this time around.